Grounds for refusal

At its 29 August 2012 meeting, IDAC resolved that a Notice of Refusal to Grant a Planning Permit be issued for the proposal on the following grounds:

The proposal does not provide an appropriate transition in height with the surrounding building stock, contrary to clause 15.01-2 (Urban Design Principles) and clause 22.10 (Built form and design policy) of the Yarra Planning Scheme.

The proposal would unreasonably impact the amenity of the dwellings to the west by virtue of overshadowing, contrary to clause 15.01-2 (Urban Design Principles) and clause 22.10 (Built form and design policy) of the Yarra Planning Scheme.

The proposal would unreasonably impact the development potential for adjoining sites due to the proximity of windows to the boundary, contrary to clause 15.01-2 (Urban Design Principles) of the Yarra Planning Scheme.

The absence of an on-site loading bay for the cafe would unreasonably impact car parking and traffic conditions in the area.

VCAT Hearing

The VCAT hearing to consider the permit application was held over three days, on 14-16 January 2013.

The order from Tribunal Members Laurie Hewet and Peter Gray addressed each of the grounds for refusal outlined by Council (as stated above).

On the question of whether a nine story building was appropriate for the area, the members stated:

“We are not persuaded by the submission of the council and the objectors that the objective...to retain Yarra’s identity as a low-rise urban form with pockets of higher development, constrains to any significant degree the acceptability of a nine storey building on this site.

“Because of the site’s Business 1 zoning, its proximity to Swan Street, its proximity to the railway station, and the predominance of commercial uses within the site’s environs, we can see no logical basis for excluding it from the (Swan Street) activity centre.

On the issue of overshadowing the members found:

“We are satisfied that the designer of the proposed development has considered the potential overlooking impacts and has provided a well conceived and acceptable outcome for the occupants of both buildings.

While on the potential to unreasonably impact neighbouring sites and the absence of an on-site loading bay, the members found:

“The sites to the north are at the rear of the Swan Street shops. These sites are affected by heritage overlays and each of the expert witnesses agreed that, whether they are developed individually or collectively, are likely to be of a lower scale than the current proposal.

“The site to the east however is not affected by a heritage overlay, and whether developed on its own or as a part of a consolidation, could be developed to a higher scale than the Swan Street properties. That eastern site is subject to the same zoning and policy provisions as the review site.

“With respect to the waiving of the loading bay for the café, we are satisfied that this small commercial use does not warrant the setting aside of land for loading and unloading purposes. Adequate opportunity exists for loading and unloading on street.”